Did UK introduce restrictions too early?

[Makeitgoaway]

Hear me out!

I don't think they planned to close schools when they did. I think the Welsh and Scotish governments forced their hand and they themselves were influenced by public opinion more than the science.

When I first heard "the plan" it sounded like there were terrible things to come but it made sense to me, as a way of controlling things as much as possible.

The public didn't like it and there was outrage that we didn't "lockdown" to protect ourselves, although "the public" also didn't behave in any sort of sensible manner to protect themselves as we saw last weekend.

So, measures were in force earlier than planned. The more restrictions there are and the earlier they are in place, the longer this thing will last. The restrictions don't protect "us", they protect the NHS. Most people will need to get it before this is over. Lockdown won't make it go away, just slow the rate of infection, meaning it takes longer to play out. While the NHS is coping, was there any need for the restrictions?

In Italy, it has taken 3 weeks for signs of social unrest to emerge. If that happens here we won't be even close to the peak at that stage. What happens then?

I wonder actually whether the delay in implementing stricter measures was, in part, to get the public on side. I think most people would have kicked off/ignored it if he's announced a lockdown straight off the bat, but as it was he waited until huge numbers of people were crying out for a lockdown.

Much too late.
Remember they were saying they wanted most of us to get it. At that point they were not trying to limit the spread.
Lots of employers were shuttin down around them including many big scientific firms like GSK, while Boris and Cummings kept going on about herd immunity.

They acted too late. The death rate we're currently seeing is for the infection rate from 3 weeks ago. That infection rate has been free to grow exponentially from then until lockdown. Which means the death rate will grow exponentially for at least the next 3 weeks, doubling every 2-3 days. By the end of next week the death rate in the UK is going to be horrific.

We won’t know until the numbers come out, which won’t be until 2022, lockdown will have it’s own issues and the longer it goes on the worse it will be, I can’t see how they can keep lockdown beyond 6 months.

And yes I agree most people do not seem to understand the exponential rate of increase.
Remember people who die of another cause but test positive for covoid 19 are not counted as covoid 19 deaths. These are people who would not have died then.

I also took my children out of school a week before they announced closures too.

Look t what NZ are doing. They are actually trying to save lives. Here they always wanted to put the economy first.

Too late. Plus combined with very little testing compared to say, Germany and South Korea.

This government has taken too political an approach. It makes me think that for health crises like this - we need to have an apolitical agency leading the response.

The problem is not the 'public', it is the 7.1m unprotected key workers. That is where the peak is going to come from.

It all depends on our ability to have enough staff and enough PPE and ventilators and facilities, as to how long we stay locked down. To say it is public opinion leading this just is not true.

@Spam88 I think Boris is a coward and was afraid to put in place unpopular measures. Total coward

Makeitgoaway - you sound confused. The court of public opinion was not demanding lockdown - some people wanted it, some didn’t. The WHO wanted lockdown. The majority of experts wanted lockdown. It’s crass to ask whether we should have waited until we could guarantee ending up like Italy. Arguably, it was left until too late to lock down London and other parts of the country could have locked down later, but given the great British public’s tendency to find even the clearest advice confusing, there is no way locking down bits of the country at a time would have worked.

The lockdown part was a weekend too late. I also think the measures don't need to be increased but those ignoring them need clamping down on - and not someone walking his dog twice a day but the gatherings, kids playing out together, people going to the shop for a packet of crisps etc.

I think the current number of deaths and rates of infection show they did it round about the right time. Only time will tell of course.

There's a delay. 14 days for symptoms to show and up to 3 weeks to die. That's potentially 5 weeks.

We've only just brought in a partial lockkdown and some people aren't even following that.

Translation : a lot of people are going to die.

Lock down could have worked earlier, but it would have taken political strength to do so and enforce it. Boris does not have that. He wants to be popular. That is fine in normal times, in times of crisis you need someone to actually lead and do what is right.

The hospital my sister works in currently has 120 confirmed cases in and other wards waiting for test results. There are few wards left that aren't covid wards.

And yes, the current number of deaths tells you nothing

At least a week too late, unfortunately.

Complete exaggeration to say there's 'civil unrest' in Italy or in China, 99% or more are getting on with it and not behaving like that. The same will probably be true in the UK, groups that are used to running around unchallenged drug dealing for example, may well kick off when their liberty to do so is taken away. One positive is that with no alcohol pubs and clubs, there's likely to be far less alcohol-related violence on the streets (although there may be a corresponding increase in DV at home as a consequence).

No, we didn't move too early- what's a few days on a situation likely to last for months. And the alternative- just carry on with the risk as it was? People were locking themselves down, and countries were locking their borders down which is why Boris' hand was forced. I wasn't going to wait to be told anyway, I'd already pulled my kids out of school, started wearing gloves on the grocery shop and started social distancing before I was told to.

We can't decide public health policy on whether there might be pockets of social unrest, although I'm sure the police/army are worried about that. I don't want my risk of disease and those around me to be compromised by the same stupid twats who start inciting civil unrest over pretty much anything (they are the same ones who attack ambulances when they go into 'their' areas).

@Spam88 "I wonder actually whether the delay in implementing stricter measures was, in part, to get the public on side. "

I think that's exactly right. They said from the start that they were using behavioural scientists in the advisory mix, and the majority of people were clamouring for lockdown when it was announced.

I agree. However I work in schools and there were not functioning well. Half the staff off half the kids off. Kids playing up. It was a nightmare. I think he has to balance keeping the ‘the end is neigh’ crowd and the young can’t tell me what to do’ crowd happy. I would not want to do his job right now.

Too little too late.
Do you have links for the civil unrest in Italy?
Only, because I live there, it would be interesting to hear what you're being told that we aren't.
There's been a couple of supermarkets rammed in Sicily, and a bloke mouthing off at the police in a town near me because the cashpoint hadn't been filled up, but beyond that we've heard nothing.

Crime figures have fallen here drastically because people aren't able to go out and police presence on the streets is blanket in most towns.

We were too late, by at least a week and I think there will be lots of questions asked when this is over. I'm saying this as a scientist with a passion for statistics, and as a teacher who saw what was a ticking timebomb in a very large school. Our building is old, cramped and confined, poor washing facilities, quite frankly, idiot children licking each other and door handles. We now have confirmed cases in our staff and student population and in the week before we closed over 500 students off, more when the shot down was announced.

No not too early. Especially if you compare with other countries.

TheCanterbury yes it’s easy for the media to spotlight one issue and make it seem bigger re Italy and raids etc